Norms as The Formation of Boundary and Place in Madurase Dwellings of Madura-Indonesia

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) e-ISSN: 2320-0847 p-ISSN : 2320-0936 Volume-5, Issue-2, pp-77-81 www.ajer.org Research Paper

Open Access

Norms as The Formation of Boundary and Place in Madurase Dwellings of Madura-Indonesia Lintu Tulistyantoro 1, Endang Titi Sunarti Bambang Darjosanjoto 2 ,Lintu Tulistyantoro 3 1

(Department of Interior Design, petra Christian University, Indonesia; Department Architecture Institut Technologi of Sepuluh Nopember, Indonesia) 2 (Department of Architecture,Institute Technologi of Sepuluh Nopember, Indonesia) 3 (Department of Architecture,Institute Technologi of Sepuluh Nopember, Indonesia)

ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the result of exploring the understanding of Madurese people live in the island of Madura, a part of East Java, Indonesia on the concept of place and boundary. The discussion was considered about spaces and practices that have been created, adopted, or invoked by the Madurese for their specific purposes.

To understand the concept of place, must deal with the meaning of boundary. Boundary in Architecture means the distinguisher between an area with the other area. Boundary not only can separate place, but it can also communicate two different places. The form of boundary has many types; it can be visible or non-visible and physical or non-physical. An expression of boundary in shaping the place can actually be determined by the cultural factor. One example of boundary by the cultural factor is norm in culture.

The norms relating with dignity have boundary and place that are so powerful and clear. Boundary by the norms has a strong impact to the place shaping. Therefore, norms have become one element to shape a place.

The norms can be non-physical but it has a very powerful boundary of place. The consequences of the norms are the boundary of the Madurese dwelling has a hierarchy, which is a very clear and strong boundary.

Keywords - Norm, boundary, place, the madurese dwelling I.

INTRODUCTION

A boundary in architectural terms may either be physical or non-physical [1][2][3]. A physical boundary can be in the form of a horizontal plane (floor and ceiling) or a vertical plane (wall). Meanwhile, a non-physical boundary may not be visually evident but it can be sensed. Through cultural perspectives, a boundary can also be formed as a result of a norm or an agreement between members of a particular society. The Madurese village of Somor Koneng, Bangkalan district in Indonesia has a unique conception of boundary between space and place. To the Madurese society, there are rules and criteria that determine a boundary. It may not be physically visible but it possesses a strong meaning because this type of boundary in this case is determined by norms.

These norms regulate the relationships between one another (particularly between the male and female).

The term “outsider male” implies the that they do not have any blood relation with one another. The relationship between females and outside males in the Madurese Society regulate under a specific rule. It is difficult for outside males to meet the females without the latters‟ male partners. Certain boundaries are thus formed and these boundaries are a result of a mutual agreement. Although these boundaries are invisible, they are very significant in terms of authority.

II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The research methodology used is qualitative research adopting the approach of Ethnography. This approach is used to discover respondent‟s insight to the roots. This research was performed under natural conditions with a complete setting and the human validation would be the main emphasis. Ethnographic research is truly related to anthropology. Today many ethnographic researches have been adopted from other research disciplines such as sociology, human geography, organizational studies, cultural studies and marketing.

This method can be referred to the ethnographic applications by Linda Wong of the discipline of Architectural studies in Thailand [4].

www.ajer.org

Page Page 77 77

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

This approach is performed holistically in the exploration, using detailed settings and complying with an unorganized system. Besides that, this method also focuses on a single case or small group, and the analysis of data emphasizes on the meaning and function of human actions. The author examined the opinions of a small group of society about a habitual pattern, custom or lifestyle that are reflected in daily life, in which an study of the daily activities of the specific group is performed as both a process and the result of this research. “..An ethnography is a description and interpretation of a cultural or social group or system. The researcher examines the group’s observable and learned patterns of behavior, customs, and ways of life..” (Harris, 1968 on Creswell, 1998).

This research emphasizes on naturalistic behaviors. The data were collected through the participatory method in which the researcher involves himself into the life of the observed people to be able to examine and record the situation thoroughly [4]. The inductive technique is used to draw conclusions from the inside, meaning that the wide range of data acquired would be squeezed to obtain a summary of ideas. Meanwhile, the data would be processed trianggulationally, comparing between literature, expert‟s opinion and field surveys in order to obtain accurate conclusive data. From this research process, a conclusion of the society‟s view regarding boundaries and place whether according to norms or physical elements would be produced.

III.

THE UNDERSTANDING OF BOUNDARY

The closest boundary is our personal boundary that could be in the form of a physical, emotional, mental or spiritual barrier. A boundary is defined as a separate condition from another. It is determined by its user, which means that every person identifies and determines his own boundaries, regulating how others would behave towards him. A physical boundary is one that relates to a sense of a personal, sexual or private space. An emotional and mental boundary involves emotions, beliefs, choices, responsibilities, priorities and relationships.

Meanwhile, a spiritual boundary involves connections with the self, religion and spiritual practices. .

Boundaries are truly related to culture and every culture has different expressions from one another. [10] In Psychology, boundaries have been defined to be of many types from physical, emotional, spiritual, sexual and relational. In the field of architecture, boundaries has also been expressed physically and non-physically[2] A physical barrier can be felt, seen and touched. Meanwhile a non-physical boundary is one that cannot be seen but could be felt, frequently termed as illutional boundary.

Besides physical boundaries, non-physical boundaries that are invisible are applicable in a few tribal society in the world. In Indonesia, a boundary takes place in the form of a rock, plant, rice field, water or a natural condition as a result of an agreement between the users in the society. Non-symbolised boundaries or those that are not physically evident have also developed but these boundaries truly bind the people‟s life, are understood and significantly held by the users of the society. These boundaries are thus driven by norms and these norms do not only form boundaries but also acts as a place that possesses a certain character of privacy.

This phenomenon is particularly related to culture and gender[15].

IV. THE RELATION BETWEEN SPACE AND PLACE Space and place are terms that have a strong connection between one another. This perception cannot be detached as they are related to one another. Physically, space is formed as a result of what surrounds it [7]. The relationship between space and place is described as an inseparable entity in the following quote: „Space and place cannot exist without each other-each summons up the other. If space is heat, fire, then place is fuel. We need both as basic elements of architecture: view a to the front and cover behind’

In order to understand place, we would have to understand space the opposite applies. The two terms involves the interaction between human beings and their environment, and contains values that differentiate one from the other. Hertzberger[7] explained the elements that acts as differentiating entities between space and place. What transforms space to place is its contents that is marked by occasions that connect between what happens in the past and the present. Place connects emotions and contains memory, for instance, no matter how far birds fly away they will always return to their nest and so thus human beings who have memories of their home after an excursion. Hertzberger also described space as a place where humans actualize, a definite entity and brings comfort to its user. Place can be in the form of a dwelling, inside, house peace and place to rest. For example, balconies, a space to play, a house and others. Place can also be an idea of a closed space with a fixed identity and non-dynamic meaning[7].

Space, on the other hand, is a comfortable feeling that is realistic, implies outside, has a distance, is dynamic and open and is bounded. Space could be presented in order to create a meaning of place, both individually in a small scale as well as in a large scale. Apart from that, space is a result of an interaction between people and their environment that differentiates with its surroundings. Thus, place could be implied as something that is bounded for security and possessed a meaning as well as an interaction between humans and their environment.

www.ajer.org

Page Page 78 78

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

The understanding of space then developed along with the arrival of cultural elements. Space emphasize on the presence of real and unreal dimensions. The real dimension is relative and can be shifted. The shift of this relative dimension occur as a result of a shift in the space‟s character. Foucoult [15] mentioned that perceiving space is not only bounded by visual boundaries but has to be viewed through its context and time at which the activity is happening. Thus, the boundary would not necessarily be limited to the physical but also the nonphysical. In this perception, it is evident that space is not marked by physical boundaries and cultural elements become the support for this notion. In reality, this value is actually truly universal and every culture possesses signs, symbols and language that hare different from one another [15].

Space is viewed as open and abstract sheet of rug. Place is part of that space that is dwelt by human beings or things that contain meaning and value. This is an interaction between humans and their environment, producing differentiating character of the surrounding area. Place is the center of sensual value, a sense of safety and tranquility where biological needs are met. According to urban experts. Madanipour [8], place is a stationary point that is bounded by a definite identity and meaning that grants an opportunity as reduced dynamism. In this paper, space and place has been distinctly differentiated in which space emphasizes on the closed entity, contains a meaning and is an interaction with the environment [8].

Space contains abstract meanings while place is a physical space or place that has an added value or meaning. A person‟s experience will influence the concept of space and place and a human body provides an articulation or meaning of space. This added value relates to the posture of the human body and articulation of time. Thus, giving meaning to space can be articulated in the posture of the human body with the human himself as the center. In Tuan‟s perception, the focus is on something that is physical and that contains meaning [9].

Furthermore, it is metioned that the expression of place is connected to meaning in which the meaning is related to time. This understanding evidently reveals place to be part of space that brings the elements of accommodation, human, activities and meaning. This notion will be used as the mindset of this research.

V.

FIELD DATA AND ANALYSIS OF SELF-VALUE IN MADURESE CULTURE

The people of Madura are fundamentally a matrilineal society in which married males would enter and live the female‟s family [9] [10]. The female is the rightful owner of the house[9]. Although this principle is becoming vague in the progress of time, the tradition of males entering the female‟s house is still evident even today, particularly in rural areas.

As in the general world as well as the traditional society, females play an important role and they are often differentiated in spatial consequences. For instance, the Greeks, North African and Latin Americans protect their females through private buildings structures. Rapoport[5] stated that females are important parts of the traditional family. Females are often connoted to reclusiveness. With an extreme method, the society protected females through a privacy that is made by this reclusiveness. This extreme value is truly distinct, abiding by strict rules in which males are made inaccessible to observe and meet the females. This expression is revealed through the articulation of space. Thus, females are often separated and positioned in a „place‟ that is protected and reclusive yet still under the supervision of the male. The expression that is visually evident is the presence of a division of space between the male and the female.

Hillier (1993: 176-179), also discussed the issue of the female roles as an important aspect. Hiller stated that the practice of the consequence of space begins from a singular space to one that is more complex.

Females are separated from the male and this boundary is very strict. This fact shows that females are truly a protected group of people.

Susan Kent[6], grouped categories according to the level of single space to a more complex one. In every category, the position of the female as a consequence of space occurs distinctly, starting from separation according to areas without physical boundary, simple boundaries to physical boundaries and the grouping of space orientation.

This study shows that the females, in the life of the traditional society, had a very specific position and this fact is truly revealed through spatial consequences. Physical boundaries can truly be seen, non-physical boundaries can also be grasped firmly and from this norm a boundary that cannot be crossed is revealed.

As mentioned by Kuntowijoyo[12], the different tribes of Indonesia also experience the same phenomenon. Males and females both possess truly distinct positions, including their spatial consequence. The Madurese females also play an important role in their society. Rifai [9] cited a Madurese quote about obedience as follws: “bhu, pa’, bhabbu’, ghuru, rato” which means mother, father, elders, teacher and king. This arrangement of obedience reveals that the priority of obedience begins from the mother, father, elders, teachers and then the government authorities. This means that the role of a mother is truly important as it is the first position of the line of obedience and respect. The next in the hierarchy are father, elders and authorities. This line of arrangement is truly important as it involves daily habits of interaction and communication. [8]. [13].

www.ajer.org

Page Page 79 79

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

Apart from that, this rule also shows that the female position in matrilocal families is the first and most important position, in which females would be granted particular protection and attention both in the family and the larger society. This fact can be seen through the structure of the dwellings of the Madura people[14]. For instance, when leaving the house, the females are always accompanied by their husbands. When a couple rents a motorcycle, they will rent two motorcycles and the driver of one of the motorcycles would sit at the back with the other driver so that the other motorcycle could be used only for the couple. Furthermore, in terms of the human activities taking place in the house from dusk to dawn, the activities of the female dominate the space inside the house compared to the male.

In daily social interactions, the Madura people hold on to their ethics very firmly and this is evident in the spatial arrangement for the males and females. The outside males have a specific area that has been formed as a result of mutual agreements and this location is at the langgar or prayer house. This space is used for them to receive guests, dine, drink as well as sleep. This boundary is very clear through the norm that has been agreed upon. There will hardly be any violation or trespassing to the female areas of the roma, dapor, etc. Their norms are truly strict and cannot be violated. If there is any violation, the consequence would be grave. The activities inside the dwelling are dominated by the females. Meanwhile, males are given a spacious area outside the dwelling which is unlike the female‟s territorial space that is more privately situated. However, this custom does not apply for females who work as traders. They would have more authority over larger areas. Today, many females of this region perform trading activities. Others would only occasionally leave the house to perform transactions in markets that are far away from their home.

The activities of female children are also truly bounded in the interior space and usually in huts called pondok. Thus their mobility area is located inside the house like that of adult females. In normal conditions where there are no outside males, their mobility area would become very large, conquering the whole area of the house.

In conditions where there are no outside males, both males and females own a slightly similar area for the main family members (father, mother and children), whereas one single family has its own territorial area, particularly connected to roma, which is regarded a truly private area. Males of other building unit are not permitted to enter other roma as this would be considered impolite. Thus the boundary is truly clear and would not be trespassed. This pattern is reflected in the storage area of the daily household tools of the males which is located in the langgar and not the roma, where the female‟s tools are stored.

Family togetherness in one unit is truly strong and this is reflected in the authority over space. The kitchen area that is dominated by female activities is not bounded by any barrier between one main family to the other.

Serving food is an activity done together. The eldest person the house takes responsibility in providing food for the family and is the key manager of the family‟s agricultural field and crops. This is evident in the observation that the eldest female would always provide food for her family members. Personal individual needs are determined by the husbands in the house who obtain money from outside through working, business, etc. This wealth and crop management system reveals that females conquer the living space as they are the owners of the house. The eldest female, in particular has the highest authority over the house. Thus, the general system of inheritance does not apply in in the Madurese family. Ownership that is passed down from generation to generation and managed communally is incapable of transferring rights over the land.

Problems arose when Indonesian Government adopted the land certificate system because according to the law, land ownership can only be given to one name. As a result, the house can only be owned by a single person when culturally, the land does not belong to one person but the whole family. The problems of land ownership are still an evident issue today. Many changes have also taken place because the tradition of following the female is also changing and thus in turn influences the rights over the house. However, authority over land in terms of function is still fundamentally given to the female as the manager of the house.

There are, however, exceptions in temporary cases such as during wedding rituals, regarding the authority over space, in which the male is permitted to enter deeper into the interior space until the permitted boundary, normally in the middle yard. This penetration occurs since there is a need for a larger space. The socialization area for outside males extends inside. Nevertheless, there is still a clear boundary of the female space in this case. Males would be served by males and femalaes by females. The boundary between the female and male is still very distinct as the society‟s norm separates one from the other and determines the boundary. Males own the area in the middle yard and langgar or prayer house while females own the kitchen area and amper (veranda). Although there is no physical boundary, males would not enter the kitchen and amper. Separation occurs for males with special cases in relation to the social status of the male, for instance a spiritual figure.

Social positions such as the head of the village would be not be a problem. The spiritual status and those that are connected to it truly influences the spatial arrangement and division as well as the vertical separation of height, which is a very important issue.

In cases like this, elements supporting the ritual that are connected to worship activities are also given a very special space. They are located in the langgar together with the spiritual people.

www.ajer.org

Page Page 80 80

American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER)

2016

Boundaries form because of function and function take place as a result of norms that separate males and females, between outside males an d inside females. Norms are thus the cause of the formations of invisible boundaries that would not be trespassed. Violation to these norms would result in prolonged conflicts and fatal issues. Violating ethical norms, for instance letting a male a female who are not legally married intermingle, would have devastating effects.

This type of case is truly avoided by the people as it is considered unethical and can trigger dangerous gossips. These would evolve into a big issue and would result in long conflicts. The Madurese society regard women as valuable beings who ought to be protected and this task is given to the males. When a female is injured, the male should be responsible for her. Disturbance to the female means disturbance to the whole family. This sort of issue has devastating effects. The maleâ€&#x;s pride is also a contributing factor in the emergence of conflicts. Emotional threats such as jealousy are truly hindered by the Madurese society to avoid conflicts.

Their norms determine their social ethics that in turn trigger the formation of distinct boundaries and space for both the males and females, particularly in relation to the outside males.

VI.

CONCLUSION

Boundaries, through the perception of the Madurese society, are not determined physically through walls and are not visually evident. They are formed as a result of norms that determine their social ethics between the male and the female. These boundaries, that are formed by norms, can be distinctly sensed and would result in grave consequences if they were trespassed. These norms have been passed down from generation to generation and though there is no written evidence, they have been strictly obeyed by the Madurese people for many centuries.

REFERENCES Books: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14]

Pile, J. F. Desain Interior. ( Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2003).

Ching, DK. Architecture: Forn, Space and Order (Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Inc, 1979).

Rengel, R., Shaping Interior Space (Unitet State: Fairchild Publication, 2007).

Groat, L., & Wang, D., Architecture Research Method (Canada: John Wiley and Son, 2002).

Rapoport, A., House, Form and Culture. (Englewood Cliff, USA: Prentice Hall, Inc, 1969).

Kent, S., Domestic Architecture and The Use of Space (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989).

Heretzberger, H. Space and The Architect. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers ,2000).

Madanipour, A., Design Of Urban Space (England: John Weley and Son, 1996).

Tuan, F. Y. (2001). Space and Place. Minnesota, USA: The University of Minnesota Press.

Rifai, M. A., Manusia Madura.( Jogjakarta: Pilar Media , 2007).

Kuntjaraningrat, Kuntowijoyo, Perubahan Sosial dalam Masyarakat Agraris Madura 1850-1940 (Jogjakarta: Mata Bangsa , 2002).

Mansurnoor, I. A., Islam in An Indonesian World Ulama of Madura. (Jogjakarta: Gadjah Mada Pres, 1990).

Wiyata, A. L, Mencari Madura. (Jakarta: Bidik-Phronesis Publishing, 2013).

Chapters in Books: [15] [16]

Foucault, M.. Of Other Spaces : Utopias and Heterotopias. In N. Leah, & N. Leah (Ed.), Rethinking Architecture, A Reader in Cultural Theory (London: Roudledge) 350-356.

Rapoport, A., Culture and Built Form. In K. D. Moore, Culture-Meaning-Architecture, Critical Reflections on The Work of Amos Rapoport (England: Ash Gate Publishing Ltd, 2000) 175-216.

www.ajer.org

Page Page 81 81